Scott Guthrie has announced that Visual Studio 2008 and .NET 3.5 are now available for download and provides a tour of some of the new features. "Visual Studio 2008 and .NET 3.5 contain a ton of new functionality and improvements. Below are links to blog posts I've done myself as well as links to videos you can watch to learn more about it."

b) ActiveRecord is POOR compared to LINQ. Its performance is horrible, it's impossible to test properly as the reference for the object tier is stored in the data tier and you are working blind at the object tier with the assumption that certain accessors are present. With LINQ, you are assured something is going to work AT COMPILE TIME.

c) Java doesnt' have an equivalent to LINQ. Python has SQLobject which doesn't even remotely compare (different model), Ruby has ActiveRecord which is totally non performant.

d) You don't need Visual studio to compile C# code - what total rubbish. csc.exe is present on ALL .Net installations (runtime!) in C:WindowsMicrosoft.NetFrameworkvWHATEVERcsc.exe and acts the same as GCC does on linux with respect to compilation. You can use cmd's type command and then use csc to compile. Idiots.

Will people stop arguing without facts?

Further rant: I have used Python (Django) and Ruby on Rails for some small projects but they just don't cut it.

There are a great many things in Ruby and Rails that are not very good performance-wise, PDF::Writer being one of them, but ActiveRecord isn't really one of them. Without some discussion about workloads etc. this doesn't really mean anything.

...it's impossible to test properly as the reference for the object tier is stored in the data tier and you are working blind at the object tier with the assumption that certain accessors are present. With LINQ, you are assured something is going to work AT COMPILE TIME.

How often have I heard that one? Getting an Intellisense drop-down box of table names, fields and accessors that the compiler can check and flag at compile time doesn't guarantee you anything ;-). If that is indeed what you mean. This is why we have these things called unit tests, that run and test actual code, and Ruby and Rails has pretty good support for them ;-). Much dynamic behaviour also becomes possible here, which is where Ruby gets its power for Rails development.

You don't need Visual studio to compile C# code - what total rubbish. csc.exe is present on ALL .Net installations (runtime!)

Why on Earth are you talking about Visual Studio and the C# compiler? I am talking about deployment, and the fact that I am installing my application on an operating system, not on half a dozen bloody runtime environments. The one target platform has disappeared, and I don't care how small the changes are.

Will people stop arguing without facts?

Hmmmmmm.

I have used Python (Django) and Ruby on Rails for some small projects but they just don't cut it.

Perhaps when you start presenting some?
All you did was present your personal opinions and experiences on various aspects. Nothing wrong with that but it's not facts and does not apply to other people and circumstances.